Canon 100D versus Olympus E-M10 II

The Canon EOS 100D (called Canon SL1 in some regions) and the Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark II are two digital cameras that were officially introduced, respectively,
in March 2013 and August 2015. The 100D is a DSLR, while the E-M10 II is a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera. The cameras are based on an APS-C (100D) and a Four Thirds sensor. The Canon has a resolution of 17.9 megapixel, whereas the Olympus provides 15.9 MP.

Body comparison

An illustration of the physical size and weight of the Canon 100D and the Olympus E-M10 II is provided in the side-by-side display below. Three consecutive views from the front, the top, and the rear side are shown. All width, height and depth measures are rounded to the nearest millimeter. If you prefer, you can also use the toggle button to switch to a comparison in percentage terms (in this case, the camera on the left – the 100D – represents 100 percent across all the size and weight measures).

Body view (100D on the left)

If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size,
the Olympus E-M10 II is notably smaller (6 percent) than the Canon 100D. Moreover, the E-M10 II is slightly lighter (4 percent) than the 100D. In this context, it is worth noting that neither the 100D nor the E-M10 II are weather-sealed.

The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete since they do not consider the interchangeable lenses
that both of these cameras require. A larger imaging sensor will tend to go along with bigger and heavier lenses, although exceptions exist.
You can find an overview of optics for the two cameras in the Canon EF Lens Catalog (100D) and the Micro Four Thirds Lens Catalog (E-M10 II). Mirrorless cameras, such as the E-M10 II, have moreover the advantage that they can use many lenses from other systems via adapters, as they have a relatively short flange to focal plane distance.

Concerning battery life, the 100D gets 380 shots out of its LP-E12 battery,
while the E-M10 II can take 320 images on a single charge of its BLS-50 power pack.

The table below summarizes the key physical specs of the two cameras alongside
a broader set of comparators. If you want to switch the focus of the display and review another
camera pair, just select a new right or left comparator from among the camera models in the table.
Alternatively, you can also move across to the CAM-parator tool and
choose from the broad selection of possible comparisons there.

The listed prices provide an indication of the market segment that the manufacturer of the cameras have been targeting. The 100D was launched at a markedly lower price (by 31 percent) than the E-M10 II, which puts it into a different market segment.
Usually, retail prices stay at first close to the launch price, but after several months, discounts become available.
Later in the product cycle and, in particular, when the replacement model is about to appear, further discounting
and stock clearance sales often push the camera price considerably down. Then, after the new model is out, very good deals can frequently be
found on the pre-owned market.

Sensor comparison

The imaging sensor is at the core of digital cameras and its size is one of the main determining factors of image quality. All other things equal, a large sensor will have larger individual pixel-units that offer better low-light sensitivity, wider dynamic range, and richer color depth than smaller pixels in a sensor of the same technological generation. Further, a large sensor camera will give the photographer additional creative options when using shallow depth-of-field to isolate a subject from its background. On the downside, larger sensors tend to be more expensive and lead to bigger and heavier cameras and lenses.

Of the two cameras under consideration, the Canon 100D features an APS-C sensor and the Olympus E-M10 II
a Four Thirds sensor. The sensor area in the E-M10 II is 32 percent smaller. As a result of these sensor size differences, the cameras have a format factor of, respectively, 1.6 and 2.0. The sensor in the 100D has a native 3:2 aspect ratio, while the one in the E-M10 II offers a 4:3 aspect.

Sensor size

With 17.9MP, the 100D offers a higher
resolution than the E-M10 II (15.9MP), but the 100D nevertheless has larger individual pixels (pixel pitch of
4.31μm versus 3.76μm for the E-M10 II) due to its larger sensor. However, the E-M10 II is a somewhat more recent model (by 2 years and 5 months) than the 100D, and its sensor
might have benefitted from technological advances during this time that further enhance the light gathering capacity of its pixels. Coming back to sensor resolution, it should be mentioned that the E-M10 II has no anti-alias filter installed, so that it can capture all the detail its sensor resolves.

Sensor resolution

For most cameras, data on sensor performance has been reported by DXO Mark. This service assesses and scores the color depth ("DXO Portrait"), dynamic range ("DXO Landscape"), and low-light sensitivity ("DXO Sports") of camera sensors, and also publishes an overall camera score. Of the two cameras under consideration, the E-M10 II has a markedly higher DXO score than the 100D (overall score 10 points higher), which will translate into better image quality. The advantage is based on 1.3 bits higher color depth, 1.2 EV in additional dynamic range, 0 stops of reduced low light sensitivity. The following table provides an overview of the physical sensor characteristics, as well as the sensor quality measurements for a selection of comparators.

Many modern cameras are not only capable of taking still images, but also of capturing video footage. Both cameras under consideration are equipped with sensors that have a sufficiently high read-out speed for moving images, but the E-M10 II provides a faster frame rate than the 100D. It can shoot movie footage at 1080/60p, while the Canon is limited to 1080/30p.

Feature comparison

Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. For example, the E-M10 II has an electronic viewfinder (2360k dots), while the 100D has an optical one.
Both systems have their advantages, with the electronic viewfinder making it possible to project supplementary shooting information
into the framing view, whereas the optical viewfinder offers lag-free viewing and a very clear framing image. The table below summarizes some of the other core capabilities of the Canon 100D and Olympus E-M10 II in connection with corresponding information for a sample of similar cameras. If you need more detail on the specs, you can find comprehensive listings, for example, in the dpreview camera hub.

More legacy lens friendly: Can use many non-native lenses via adapters.

Sharper images: Has stabilization technology build-in to reduce the impact of hand-shake.

More modern: Reflects 2 years and 5 months of technical progress since the 100D launch.

If the count of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a measure, the E-M10 II is the clear winner of the contest (11 : 6 points). However, the relevance of individual strengths will vary across photographers, so that you might want to apply your own weighing scheme to the summary points.

100D 06:11 E-M10 II

In any case, while the comparison of the spec-sheets of cameras can offer a general idea of their imaging potential, it says nothing about, for example, the handling, responsiveness, and overall imaging quality of the 100D and the E-M10 II in practical situations. At times, user reviews, such as those published at amazon, address these issues in a useful manner, but such feedback is on many occasions incomplete, inconsistent, and unreliable. This is why expert reviews are important. The table below summarizes the assessments of some of the best known camera review sites. The detailed reviews can be accessed, respectively, on the websites of cameralabs.com, dpreview.com, ephotozine.com, imaging-resource.com, and photographyblog.com.

The above review scores should be interpreted with care, though. The ratings were established in reference to similarly priced cameras that were available in the market at the time of the review. Thus, a score needs to be put into the context of the launch date and the launch price of the camera, and rating-comparisons among cameras that span long time periods or concern very differently equipped models make little sense. Also, please note that some of the review sites have changed their methodology and reporting over time.

Other comparisons

In case you are interested in seeing how other cameras pair up, just make your choice using the following search menu. An an alternative, you can also directly jump to any one of the listed comparisons that were previously generated by the CAM-parator tool. If you cannot find the camera you are interested in, please contact me, and I will try to locate and add the respective data to the application.